Manual safetys on semi pistols - yes or no?

[Billy Shears]

I do not whine about what you call it. You stop whine about what I call it. No one forced you to read my post.

And no one forced you to vitiate your own argument by pushing a ridiculous, technobabble term that the rest of us are not going to accept as a replacement for a standard term that has been accepted in general use for over a century. You painted yourself into that corner. The rest of us find it absurd, and are telling you so. If you don't like that fine, but that's the price you pay for making yourself look foolish.

 

[HisStigness]

Could a moderator please come and lock or delete this thread?

 

[Mike1234567]

*crybabies*

 

[HisStigness]

Would you not agree that is 250 posts of absolutely nothing useful?

 

[TestPilot]

Would you not agree that is 250 posts of absolutely nothing useful?

If you cared to read it, there actually was a discussion of the risks and benefits regarding the OP's question.

I have even answered your question of "If it's an option, who wouldn't you take it?..." Don't claim it is nothing, only because you did not like the answer.

 

[Mike1234567]

I wasn't calling anyone specifically a crybaby. I was just trying to lighten the mood a bid. Sheesh... this discussion is just about manual safeties. We all have our preferences. I like them. You ARE all crybabies though.

 

[HisStigness]

The first 150 posts contained useful discussion about manual safeties. And yes, TestPilot I did appreciate your response to my question. But the last 100 posts have been people arguing about gun terminology and accusing people of having a big ego. Will discussions like this make onlookers want to join our community? I think not.

 

[HisStigness]

I wasn't calling anyone specifically a crybaby. I was just trying to lighten the mood a bid. Sheesh... this discussion is just about manual safeties. We all have our preferences. I like them. You ARE all crybabies though.

 

[Nom de Forum]

Actually, no. I've grown quite fond of the M&P and have decided that for me, it works far better than a Glock or the other imitators. I have, in fact, had to learn many new tricks over the years, from transitioning over and over from 1911s to M9s to 3rd Gen S&Ws to Glocks to H&Ks to M&Ps ... I've got a stack of instructor guides and armorer manuals in a closet, which if removed would allow Imelda Marcos' complete shoe collection to be put in it ...

My fondness for the M&P is growing to the point of dropping the Glock. I have been renting a 9 and 40. Despite 23 years now with the Glock it has never felt as great in my hand as the M&P. My group size durning full speed under 10 yard firing is better. I can only attribute this to the way it fits my hand. Dropping the Glock will be a huge step away from time, money, equipment, and experience. I have two 9s, three 40s, a 10, conversion barrels for 9 and 9X25, .22 rimfire conversion kit, and a bunch of parts and accessories. There are also the few things I don’t like about the M&P compared to the Glock: detailed stripping, and durability and reliability under adverse conditions. Even with all the negatives to switching I just may do it. Feeling good about your equipment is almost as important as it being good.


Yes, I know what it's like to have to retrain experienced people (as well as those who believe they're experienced); a huge challenge in academies is often taking former military (especially those who've made multiple combat deployments) or self-taught gun enthusiasts and teaching them a decidedly non-military deadly force policy, brand-new rules of engagement, how to NOT handle firearms, and when to handle them ...

Amen.

I try (sometimes even successfully) to check my ego at the front door every time I go to work, but I have found that in striving for the witty riposte, the ultimate comeback, or to sum up a situation like the Jedi Master --- here's an example below, recognize this? -- isn't always the best way to actually provide useful instruction:
Now, I'll give Clint Smith or Pat Rogers a pass if they wanna say weird stuff like that ... but I'll just finish by quoting you again:
Pot, meet kettle ...

I never think “witty riposte, the ultimate comeback, or to sum up a situation like the Jedi Master” is ever the best way “to actually provide useful instruction”. Nor do I think this forum is really about that or could be. I think this forum is the place for a little levity mixed with opinion and fact for fun information exchange. When “great gun gurus” like Cooper in the past, and Smith, Rogers, etc. do it I think it more puffery self-promotion of their images than confirmation of credibility. Frankly I don’t think any of them are as impressive as their P.R. makes them out to be. I don’t instruct anymore, but when I did I was plain of language and methodical to reinforce the seriousness of handling “death dealing devices”. Sorry couldn’t resist using two bits of alliteration because I am here to have some fun.

I see myself more as a frying pan, teflon coated of course to match my plastic fantastic pistol. I think you are more of a cast iron frying pan. Both doing the same thing just with different materials.

Oh, and yeah, hyperbole and unsupported generalizations presented as "fact" does tend to make me cranky ... but I'll feel better after I take a few 1911s, charming anachronisms for sure, to the range this weekend (maybe an SAO SIG w/safety and a few 3rd Gen Smiths, too). Have a great holiday, Nom de Forum.

Your 1911s are practically cutting edge technology compared to what I use to “un-crank”: Nagant, Webley, and ’58 Remington.

 

[Hokkmike]

Kind of sad to see my "longest ever thread" morph this way. Not exactly "the high road".

My OP was genuine however.

 

[Old Dog]

Naw, Hokkmike, it's not sad -- see: Nom de Forum and I have found common ground and shown that despite disagreeing on the point of manual safeties being unnecessary and anachronistic, we actually agree on a quite a few things! Isn't that what it's all about? (although, not that I need to have the last word, the one person's insistence on making up his name for the safety did kinda get things silly)

 

[danez71]

Please, please, please provide the thread locations where people have reported experiencing the situation you describe!!!

Danez71,

Your comments are not in anyway convincing to me and neither are mine to you. I don't think anything more can be written to change that.

I don't want to restart this argument but I just have to point out something.

There are 2 other people in the last page (besides me) that supported my statement. One of those did not claim to have short fingers.

That should, in some way, be convincing to you.

Maybe in the future you can cut the condescending bull and keep an open mind.

Statements, for example, such as the 'please please please' and '3 speed trans in an 8 speed world' are an act of degradation rather than anything that resembles a respectful debate.

People, myself included at times, will reply with a style that is like-wise to yours.

Danez71,

You can have the last words on this topic. Have fun deciding on and using your best bang for the buck bolt action rifle. Merry Christmas.

That wasn't my thread. Close though! Mine was the 'best bang for $$ round'; not rifle.


All I'm hoping this post will accomplish for anyone/everyone is that.... While a person may not have 1/100th of your knowledge, you can still learn something from that person because NO ONE knows it all.

My Merry Christmas wishes was and still is still genuine.

 

[Nom de Forum]

I'll make this thread one of those!

I am an LEO whose department issues Glock 17's; no other firearm is approved for duty carry (except the Glock 19 or 26 for detectives, which have exactly the same dimensions, as far as the trigger is concerned). It hasn't happened often, but this very year, during our yearly qualifications, I had it happen twice. During one phase of the Q course, you have to draw from the retention holster and fire two shots in three seconds until you magazine (loaded with 12 rounds) is empty.

I happen to have short fingers, and even with the proper firing grip, only get the very tip of my finger on the trigger face. During that phase of the Q course, you have to execute your draw and fire your two shots quickly, before the target turns away. In my haste, I twice fumbled that move slightly, and found myself pressing on the side of the trigger so the gun wouldn't fire. I quickly adjusted, and managed to fire my shots anyway, but it still resulted in a fraction of a second's delay that I wouldn't want to experience in a gunfight. And as I said, I don't have the option of switching to another weapon, at least not on duty.

You have my sympathy for your problem. What do you think is your best course of action to eliminate this problem? Am I correct in assuming you have already approached your agency for a waiver to use a pistol that fits you? Perhaps there is a SGT Pepper in your agency that could facilitate this? Could one of the companies that re-contours Glocks be the answer? If a contour change sufficiently shortened the length of pull do you think your agency would permit it? I have some concept for what your problem is because my G20 is just at the point of beginning to push the limits for me, it is no where near as comfortable as my G17/22s. BTW I don't think the Glocks trigger safety is as good idea as a well designed trigger blocking grip safety, it is only easier and cheaper to design and install. A Glock with a trigger blocking grip safety and a 1911 automatically operating sear safety would both be great. I hope you and your agency can work something out to prevent future problems that could be far worse than those experienced at the Q range.

 

[Nom de Forum]

I don't want to restart this argument but I just have to point out something.

There are 2 other people in the last page (besides me) that supported my statement. One of those did not claim to have short fingers.

That should, in some way, be convincing to you.

Maybe in the future you can cut the condescending bull and keep an open mind.

Statements, for example, such as the 'please please please' and '3 speed trans in an 8 speed world' are an act of degradation rather than anything that resembles a respectful debate.

People, myself included at times, will reply with a style that is like-wise to yours.

That wasn't my thread. Close though! Mine was the 'best bang for $$ round'; not rifle.

All I'm hoping this post will accomplish for anyone/everyone is that.... While a person may not have 1/100th of your knowledge, you can still learn something from that person because NO ONE knows it all.

My Merry Christmas wishes was and still is still genuine.

Two grains of sand do not make a beach. What is perceived as either "condescending bull" or intentional hyperbole with equal measures of sarcasm and levity is often determined by the thickness of one's skin and the depth one's experience. I can assure you I long ago attained sufficient knowledge to have some idea just how little I do know. How about you let me have the "last word" this time so we can stop muddying up this thread before it gets closed?

 

[Nom de Forum]

Kind of sad to see my "longest ever thread" morph this way. Not exactly "the high road".

My OP was genuine however.

Don't be sad. A really great thread does far more than what the OP was created to do. What Old Dog wrote is very true. This forum is as much social as informational. Building social relationships is a great aid to information exchange because they focus attention. If you think this thread has morphed you should visit one of the Aviation forums to see what morphing can be. Your thread is fine. A certain amount of going in what seem to be pointless different directions often finds an unexpected path to your intended destination. In other words, there is always more chaff than wheat, but the wheat is worth putting up with the chaff.

 

[Billy Shears]

You have my sympathy for your problem. What do you think is your best course of action to eliminate this problem? Am I correct in assuming you have already approached your agency for a waiver to use a pistol that fits you? Perhaps there is a SGT Pepper in your agency that could facilitate this? Could one of the companies that re-contours Glocks be the answer? If a contour change sufficiently shortened the length of pull do you think your agency would permit it? I have some concept for what your problem is because my G20 is just at the point of beginning to push the limits for me, it is no where near as comfortable as my G17/22s. BTW I don't think the Glocks trigger safety is as good idea as a well designed trigger blocking grip safety, it is just easier and cheaper to design and install. A Glock with a trigger blocking grip safety and a 1911 automatically operating sear safety would both be great. I hope you and your agency can work something out to prevent future problems that could be far worse than those experience at the Q range.

No, I haven't approached anyone. It would be a waste of time. Not only is the current range master a little guy with Napoleon complex, who knows better than everyone else, but the department itself, going back decades to when they still issued S&W revolvers, has never permitted alternate weapons to the issued ones. I think this is partly because they are too cheap to train the department's armorers to handle any additional weapon types.

And it doesn't help that I shoot 100s every year. I'm glad I do, you understand, but in this case, it would only make them say "obviously you're not having any real problems here; request denied."

If I had my druthers, I'd carry a full size 1911 (never gonna happen -- the departments if firmly anti-single action), or failing that, my Steyr, which fits my hand much better, and is very Glock like in its function. But alas, I am stuck with what I got. Anyway, this issue has only cropped up a couple of times at the range; the vast majority of the time, I shoot the gun just fine. As I said, I regularly shoot 100s. I'll just have to live with it.

 

[Nom de Forum]

No, I haven't approached anyone. It would be a waste of time. Not only is the current range master a little guy with Napoleon complex, who knows better than everyone else, but the department itself, going back decades to when they still issued S&W revolvers, has never permitted alternate weapons to the issued ones. I think this is partly because they are too cheap to train the department's armorers to handle any additional weapon types.

Well that sucks and is not an uncommon situation in my experience.


And it doesn't help that I shoot 100s every year. I'm glad I do, you understand, but in this case, it would only make them say "obviously you're not having any real problems here; request denied."

Statistically it isn't a problem, except when it happens to cause you to be a statistic. A classic example how no matter the unlikelihood of something happening the consequences are so catastrophic that you take every measure possible to prevent it. Why don't you try that tactic. After all it is not expensive to have a Glock frame re-contoured. Make your request in front of witnesses and in an email so it can not just disappear. If you can find other examples of this problem happening (like the threads on this forum that were said to exist) that should also be presented to the decision makers.

If I had my druthers, I'd carry a full size 1911 (never gonna happen -- the departments if firmly anti-single action), or failing that, my Steyr, which fits my hand much better, and is very Glock like in its function. But alas, I am stuck with what I got. Anyway, this issue has only cropped up a couple of times at the range; the vast majority of the time, I shoot the gun just fine. As I said, I regularly shoot 100s. I'll just have to live with it.

I almost suggested a Steyr to you. 1911s are just about the most difficult pistol to have authorized for law enforcement. Too many civilians freak out seeing one cocked and locked. Even the U.S. Army when I was in made everyone including MPs carry it holstered with a empty chamber. Army Brass seemed to think the thumb safety was for making the pistol safer after it had been fired prior to being fired again.

 

[danez71]

Two grains of sand do not make a beach. What is perceived as either "condescending bull" or intentional hyperbole with equal measures of sarcasm and levity is often determined by the thickness of one's skin and the depth one's experience. I can assure you I long ago attained sufficient knowledge to have some idea just how little I do know. How about you let me have the "last word" this time so we can stop muddying up this thread before it gets closed?

LOL, you gave me last word but you couldn't follow through.

Then while doing so, you chose to not acknowledge the others that supported my statement (heaven forbid you swallowing any pride and accept the fact that you weren't right) AND you chose to include more condescending remarks.

You're right about 2 grains not making a beach, but numerous grains start making a sand bar and sand bars add nothing to 'high performance'; only a hindrance. It has been noted by others in this thread as well.

So, yes. You can have last word and take your final digs to make yourself feel superior and I'll follow through and not reply as I think you're incapable of anything more than what you've already shown with your comments.

 

[Nom de Forum]

LOL, you gave me last word but you couldn't follow through.

Then while doing so, you chose to not acknowledge the others that supported my statement (heaven forbid you swallowing any pride and accept the fact that you weren't right) AND you chose to include more condescending remarks.

You're right about 2 grains not making a beach, but numerous grains start making a sand bar and sand bars add nothing to 'high performance'; only a hindrance. It has been noted by others in this thread as well.

So, yes. You can have last word and take your final digs to make yourself feel superior and I'll follow through and not reply as I think you're incapable of anything more than what you've already shown with your comments.

Well I did give you the last words back in post #240. You took it with one more post (#241) directed to me, but after a brief pause decided to go after me again. The last words means no more words to follow. You broke the agreement so don't play the victim. I have really gotten under your skin. It is obvious you are just furiously angry. So because I sincerely wish to end your fury I used my time traveling abilities to give you a gift I hope will make you feel better. You can find my gift in post #180.

Back to the something resembling the topic of this thread: There is no such thing as one size fits all. Anyone with short fingers having problems with a pistol that is too big for their hand should use a different pistol. Any organization forcing them to use one that does not fit is being negligent in their duty to protect its members. Regardless of whether a pistol has a trigger safety, if the length of pull is inappropriate for your hand you should find a different gun.

Merry Christmas to all and thank you for your patience.

 

[AnthonySmithXR]

I've been thinking a lot on this. Would you want no safety (or manual sear disconnector blocking disengagement mechanism--whatever) in a rifle? Shotgun? Does anyone complain about the safety in their AR or selector in the M16 or AK? And you carry a long gun in a much less intimate way than a handgun. Particularly in IWB or pocket carry. Seems I'd want MORE safety in a handgun? Idk.

 

[TestPilot]

I've been thinking a lot on this. Would you want no safety (or manual sear disconnector blocking disengagement mechanism--whatever) in a rifle? Shotgun? Does anyone complain about the safety in their AR or selector in the M16 or AK?
....

As a matter of fact I would not want a manual firing inhibitor thumb switch on a rifle either, if two conditions are met:

- It comes with a M&P or Glock like trigger.
- There is some sort of trigger cover that acts like a holster that can completely come off the gun, just like an unholstered pistol when the rifle is held in ready posture. Once the gun is out of the holster, or the trigger cover that acts as a holster and released just as fast as a holster, there must be no issue of having anything on the gun that requires any manipulation to enable firing function or having to hold down a lever to keep it from moving, etc.

Also, you must not be familiar with AK to not know about people complaining about AK selector lever.

Also, M870 type "cross bolt" buttons are very cumbersome to manipulate. If I ran a gun company, any engineer who brings up putting a "cross bolt" button would be fired on the spot. They do not deserve to get paid to design a combat gun.

I never said choosing a gun that has a thumb lever is wrong. But, I will definitely say that it is WRONG to install a "cross bolt" type button on a gun designed for security use. It is downright inferior design which has no place. I hated it on M870, M249, and M240. I actually think M249 designer secretly hated soldiers and designed it to make soldiers suffer.

...
And you carry a long gun in a much less intimate way than a handgun. Particularly in IWB or pocket carry. Seems I'd want MORE safety in a handgun? Idk.

In any case, I carry my pistol in a holster. OWB, IWB, pocket carry, the trigger is covered while in carry. That is not the case with carrying a rifle like an AR-15 with the trigger exposed.

 

[Mike1234567]

The use of non-industry-standard terms is silly and somewhat annoying. This doesn't make you appear more intelligent. It makes you appear as though you want/need to appear more intelligent.

"Manual firing inihibitor thumb swich"... really? BTW, please check your spelling.

 

[TestPilot]

The use of non-industry-standard terms is silly and somewhat annoying. This doesn't make you appear more intelligent. It makes you appear as though you want/need to appear more intelligent.

I will simply stop debating anything regarding the term I use in this thread. If it is not obvious to you by now, I will not be convinced to call it a "safety" when it does not make a gun safer.

If you want to debate anything that is actually related to the topic, I will be happy to reply.

 

[TestPilot]

Regarding the issue of rifles, the problem also comes from training industry's current trend to force manipulating the lever every time the gun goes on and off the target, and most of these guns are not designed for that. AK would be the obvious case.

The end result is this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfGnz38K9ik

I think Travis Haley is an excellent instructor, but to argue that we should hold an AK with the trigger hand not properly gripping the grip just to have the 4 fingers hover over the selector lever not designed to be operated the way he teaches is ridiculous.

There are weapon retention issues, since the trigger hand is just touching the gun, not actually gripping it. In cases like opening doors, or any other use of support hand other than gripping the gun, the AK cannot be held like that. If the trigger hand just holds the AK with the trigger hand gripping the gun with the AK in firing inhibit mode, while the support hand is doing things like opening door, the capability to shoot is totally gone. There is also issues with swtiching the side of the shoulder the stock is mounted, since that method cannot be used with a left hand.

So, what do these instructors do with such questions? They just pretend those questions do not exist.

 

[2wheels]

As a matter of fact I would not want a manual firing inhibitor thumb switch on a rifle either, if two conditions are met:

- It comes with a M&P or Glock like trigger.
- There is some sort of trigger cover that acts like a holster that can completely come off the gun, just like an unholstered pistol when the rifle is held in ready posture. Once the gun is out of the holster, or the trigger cover that acts as a holster and released just as fast as a holster, there must be no issue of having anything on the gun that requires any manipulation to enable firing function or having to hold down a lever to keep it from moving, etc.

That just doesn't seem practical, and I don't see many people wanting a Glock style trigger on a rifle anyways. Your idea sounds something like this dubious idea for a Glock holster...

http://aegisarmory.us/shop/kydexholsters/the-guardian-kydex-trigger-guard/

Ok, I've yanked the cover off and I'm ready to rock and roll. But now I want to safe my rifle so I can sling it over my back, time to fumble for the little trigger cover! That is... If it hasn't been lost.

At least the way I'm imagining your idea, it doesn't seem as simple or as fast as having a manual safety in a good location that I can quickly flick on or off.